Cupid Share Discussion Threads

[ramsey11] 25/9/2013 09:44

Hey j....what were u saying about iof ?????Do u get anything rightDaddy still supplementing ya lifestyle

[knigel] 24/9/2013 22:52

To sum it all up... little downside but significant recovery upside imo

[jonc] 24/9/2013 21:09

btw

PMSL

[jonc] 24/9/2013 21:09

J777J

How much are you losing so far?

Must be a great deal judging by your bitterness and vitriol.

Get a life mate.

[cammy3] 24/9/2013 18:46

J777j wouldn't get involved. The market took this down and filled orders from toscafund and Directors is my take. Watch out for holdings statements. We"ll be back above £1 in no time.

[ramsey11] 24/9/2013 15:39

No need to wake up here j

[report_reader] 24/9/2013 15:07

@J777J

I don't trade, I invest. Experience has taught me that Technical analysis doesn't work over time. If for example a short term long position was taken on any number of occasion leading up to cupids massive decline, a trader could have been caught out on the 50% drop that happened in a single trading day. This is proof that technical analysis is dangerous with a stock heavily shorted like Cupid and doesn't work.

Quoting Warren Buffet on technical analysis: "I realized that technical analysis didn't work when I turned the chart upside down and didn't get a different answer".

Disagree with him?

Then please name only 1 trader using technical analysis who's had an anual growth rate of 20% for at least 10 years.

The simple fact is they don't exist.

[ramsey11] 24/9/2013 15:07

He's drowning big time...Get some armbands j

[cammy3] 24/9/2013 14:30

Market cleverly scooped up shares from weak holders this morning. No doubt Directors and Toscafund taking care of those now.

[j777j] 24/9/2013 14:21

Truth is the first casualty of the shorts.


Actually if you bothered to look at the chart you will see the shares have thrown up a considerable number of trading opportunities.

It helps that one is able to both anticipate and read shorts, like a book.

[report_reader] 24/9/2013 13:35

@J777J

If you had a smidgen of brains you would check my posting history and see that I'm someone who goes long only on stocks.

Instead of jumping to the conclusion that I'm a shorter because my views don't fit with your current position on Cupid.

By the way as a percentage how much are you currently underwater on Cupid?

You've been posting on here for a while since you bought and the share price has progressively dropped.

Have you averaged down?

[j777j] 24/9/2013 13:15

All these charitable posters concerned for our welfare.


ROFL

[report_reader] 24/9/2013 13:11

WyleCoyote,

What I'm saying is, Cupid has to pay through the nose for advertising to get it's revenue. Despite increased revenue it's made less profit.

Increased revenue doesn't mean a thing if they can't obtain the net profit from it.

Surely that tells you something?

It's not about the average punter, there is no doubt Cupid can generate cash. The doubt is it's business model. All the negative reports about it's business being unsustainable have proven correct, and it's right there in the companies official report to read. Everything the negative reports said would happen has happened.

Good luck to you though, I honestly hope the company proves me wrong and comes good, it's not nice losing large amounts of money. I lost around £15K on my investment of this company. I caught it just before the 50% drop happened in one day, selling around the 101p mark. It could have been a lot worse if I had not been watching my portfolio on a daily basis.

[cammy3] 24/9/2013 12:40

Toscafund will be quietly loading up ahead of an MBO

[wylecoyote] 24/9/2013 12:35

RR,

how is it any different to any other organisation when publishing reports? You have to trust the integrity of what they say. Yes, I admit that advertising costs have gone up. Are you surprised? I'm not, they have been plugging 'uniform dating' quite intensly since the negative stories came out. They have clearly taken legal advice and performed a cost benefit exercise and have determined that it isn't worth the time and effort to persue a claim against these allegations. A sensible option in my opinion. Also, for smaller organisations, 'any' news is good news. There is no such thing as negative press.

In fact, I watched panorama last night, maybe I should start shorting ABF as they appear to have indirectly caused the factory disaster in India and their practises are dubious.

Still, are you telling me that the average punter knows if 'uniform dating' is owned by Cupid? Do they even care? They use these websites in order to meet like minded individuals. If they go on to the casual dating sites(which doesn't apply anymore) and are enticed to pay via a fake profile(whether it is cupid generated or otherwise) of someone who appears to fancy them, that is their own fault. I have used them before and they do work as long as you are realistic about your expecations.

The facts suggest that this is still very cash generative and CUP could effectively buy themselves out with the consideration on disposal. They expect to make a gain on the disposal, so I would be very surprised if this drops below 50.0p Also, I think they have taken an opportunity to write down some costs during the PR disaster and they are clearly looking to move on from it.

[j777j] 24/9/2013 12:25

Facts shorters can't bear to read......


Chief Executive Officer's Statement

The future remains positive for online dating. On both sides of the Atlantic and in developing economies we see continuing evidence of growth fuelled by an ever-growing social acceptance of the offering and the ubiquity of mobile. The UK market is now estimated at GBP170m, with over 5m people using online dating and one in five dates beginning online. In the US it is estimated that a third of marriages start online

[report_reader] 24/9/2013 12:13

WyleCoyote

It's old, but none of it has ever been addressed. And it's a hell of a coincidence that the company now has to pay more for advertising IMMEDIATELY after it was exposed for creating fake profiles by "motivational managers". It has now stopped this practice and it now needs to pay more for advertising.

Why did the RNS not give reasons for the increased advertising? Why had margin dropped?

They might be cutting costs, but why do they have to cut costs? They don't tell shareholders anything they don't want them to hear.

And the markets not stupid which is why the share price has taken a beating today.

[bookbroker] 24/9/2013 12:11

Wow, this is one unpopular co., Dobbie evidently got a job on his hands to respond to all these negative posts, is this co. the only culprit to have been accused of using fake profiles, once had a Match a/c., frankly it's a bit of waste of time, but then there are a lot of folk desperate to find love at any cost and disappointment, couldn't be bothered with all the old boilers who kept winking at me so closed the account, found it mildly amusing despite the cost, but for the sensitive souls one would think it to be somewhat demoralising and not exactly beneficial to an individuals self-esteem. Still dating online is here to stay, so this co. certainly got a future.

[wylecoyote] 24/9/2013 12:02

J777J,

I was going to say the same thing....Even if it is old, in my opinion the shorters created an opportunity and that the short argument is week as it is old. Cupid is restructuring it's business model as a result(I am old school and thought it was fine in it's original format - still they have to keep the market happy), they did nothing wrong. Other than the fact that shorters kept looking for conspiracy theories to support their own argument, regardless of the facts and the bottom line. Later on, I will read the report and find a reason to take a short position...;-)

[report_reader] 24/9/2013 12:01

@J777J

There's nothing funny about a 30% loss. And none of the above concerns were ever addressed by the company.

An audit paid for by the company is not independent.

Where is this legal advice they were getting? Where is the result of that?

Why has advertising increased immediately after they were exposed for employing people to create fake profiles to take money from gullible customers?

Is it because advertising costs more than employing low paid Ukrainian workers to scam people into taking out subscriptions?

Everything the shorter's said has ACTUALLY CAME TRUE.

I wouldn't touch a CFD or Spreadbet with a barge pole, it's betting simple as that and most people lose at the bookies.

[j777j] 24/9/2013 11:55

Shorters only ever repeat the same out dated news.


Funny that ,but everything the above poster has mentioned was nearly a year old.